Thank you for visiting SNEWPapers!
Sign up free
Story
April 19, 1838
Alexandria Gazette
Alexandria, Alexandria County, District Of Columbia
What is this article about?
U.S. Senate debates bill to prohibit circulation of notes from the late Bank of the United States, with penalties up to 10 years hard labor and $10,000 fine. Discussion involves Senators Grundy, Clay, King, Linn, Strange, Smith, Wall, and Niles; bill postponed to next day.
Clipping
OCR Quality
95%
Excellent
Full Text
United States Bank Notes.
The Senate on Tuesday resumed the consideration of the bill to prohibit the issuing and circulation of the notes of the late Bank of the U. States, under a penalty of not more than ten years confinement to hard labor, and a fine not exceeding $10,000, one or both, at the discretion of the court, and giving the United States courts jurisdiction to issue injunctions.
Mr. Grundy said as no one appeared prepared to speak on this subject it might be well to delay the action on the bill for a day or two.
Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, said it was quite possible that no one was desirous to speak, but they might, notwithstanding be ready to vote upon it.
Mr. King said the bill was one of much importance, and he therefore thought it had better lie over till to-morrow.
Mr. Clay said, certainly, if the friends of the bill desired it, but Mr. S. was very desirous to have the vote taken, to see if a majority of the Senate were ready to assert the power claimed by the bill.
Mr. Linn said if the gentleman from Alabama desired to speak on the subject he would be very glad to hear him; otherwise he thought it was well to take the vote at once.
Mr. King had now no intention of speaking, and if the Senate thought best to take the vote now he must vote against the bill.
Mr. Strange said he agreed with the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary (Mr. Grundy) that the conduct complained of was a very great abuse: but doubted the power of Congress to pass this bill, and he should therefore vote against it.
Mr. Smith, of Connecticut, said he had not examined the bill so as to be ready to vote upon it, and as a gentleman to whom he had confidence, expressed a doubt respecting it, he wished it postponed until to-morrow.
Mr. Wall said the bill had been on the table more than a month; but if any gentleman had not examined it, he had no objection to postpone it a day, though in saying this he did no mean to intimate the least doubt of the constitutionality of the bill: and if any gentleman had constitutional objections, he would like to hear them expressed.
Mr. Niles was also in favor of delay; and
The bill was accordingly postponed till to-morrow.
The Senate on Tuesday resumed the consideration of the bill to prohibit the issuing and circulation of the notes of the late Bank of the U. States, under a penalty of not more than ten years confinement to hard labor, and a fine not exceeding $10,000, one or both, at the discretion of the court, and giving the United States courts jurisdiction to issue injunctions.
Mr. Grundy said as no one appeared prepared to speak on this subject it might be well to delay the action on the bill for a day or two.
Mr. Clay, of Kentucky, said it was quite possible that no one was desirous to speak, but they might, notwithstanding be ready to vote upon it.
Mr. King said the bill was one of much importance, and he therefore thought it had better lie over till to-morrow.
Mr. Clay said, certainly, if the friends of the bill desired it, but Mr. S. was very desirous to have the vote taken, to see if a majority of the Senate were ready to assert the power claimed by the bill.
Mr. Linn said if the gentleman from Alabama desired to speak on the subject he would be very glad to hear him; otherwise he thought it was well to take the vote at once.
Mr. King had now no intention of speaking, and if the Senate thought best to take the vote now he must vote against the bill.
Mr. Strange said he agreed with the chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary (Mr. Grundy) that the conduct complained of was a very great abuse: but doubted the power of Congress to pass this bill, and he should therefore vote against it.
Mr. Smith, of Connecticut, said he had not examined the bill so as to be ready to vote upon it, and as a gentleman to whom he had confidence, expressed a doubt respecting it, he wished it postponed until to-morrow.
Mr. Wall said the bill had been on the table more than a month; but if any gentleman had not examined it, he had no objection to postpone it a day, though in saying this he did no mean to intimate the least doubt of the constitutionality of the bill: and if any gentleman had constitutional objections, he would like to hear them expressed.
Mr. Niles was also in favor of delay; and
The bill was accordingly postponed till to-morrow.
What sub-type of article is it?
Historical Event
What themes does it cover?
Justice
Crime Punishment
What keywords are associated?
Senate Debate
Bank Notes
Legislation
Prohibition Bill
Constitutional Doubt
What entities or persons were involved?
Mr. Grundy
Mr. Clay Of Kentucky
Mr. King
Mr. Linn
Mr. Strange
Mr. Smith Of Connecticut
Mr. Wall
Mr. Niles
Where did it happen?
U.S. Senate
Story Details
Key Persons
Mr. Grundy
Mr. Clay Of Kentucky
Mr. King
Mr. Linn
Mr. Strange
Mr. Smith Of Connecticut
Mr. Wall
Mr. Niles
Location
U.S. Senate
Event Date
Tuesday
Story Details
Senate resumes debate on bill prohibiting issuance and circulation of notes from the late Bank of the United States, with severe penalties. Senators discuss readiness to vote, constitutional doubts, and importance; bill postponed to next day.